RE: IFS files and VARPG

Hi Peter,
 
<snip>
I'm curious - what is it you like about RPG?  Why not just use C or C++? Why
use F-specs at all in your RPG?  You could be using APIs to open
database files also, and that would make your RPG more like C; then you
could convert your RPG to C very easily.  But if that's your goal, why even
write anything in RPG?  What's it got over C or C++ that keeps you using it?
</snip>

I love RPG. It is much better than C, and one of the reasons is the database
support via F-specs. It is an EXTREMELY POWERFUL business language which
kicks every other language's ass! My argument (which is developing as this
thread evolves :-) ) is not about making RPG more like C. It is about using
the right tools for the job.
 
If we are going to introduce new functionality to the language or expose the
language to new interfaces/environments, and this new functionality is in
common use in many other languages, then we owe it to the other languages to
see what they got right and what they got wrong. We can emulate what went
right and discard what went wrong. That's how we got java out of C++. What I
really don't want in ten years time is to be putting keywords in my F-specs
like FORMAT(*XLS), FORMAT(*DOC), or FORMAT(*XML). I guess it is a personal
thing, but I don't think having F-specs for every possible external file
type is the right way to go just because we did it for database, print, and
display files. Having said that, if it is there I'll probably use it. ;-)  

<snip>
I guess I'm just not getting the argument that F-specs are only one line of
code and it's better to have several lines of code to handle stream files
because it's more like C.
</snip>

There is a phrase - "When you have a hammer everything starts to look like
nails". I just don't want F-specs to be my programming hammer. :-)
 
I'm not saying I'm right, and I don't expect everybody to agree with me. It
is an opinion - just one among many.
 
Cheers
 
Larry